More About:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency doesn’t necessarily have farm interests lined up in its crosshairs, but it’s not exactly ignoring agriculture as a target of opportunity either.

“We’ve had it pretty good in agriculture for a long time,” said Shannon Ferrell, assistant professor at Oklahoma State University, during the recent Rural Economics Outlook Conference on the Stillwater campus. “EPA went after the low-hanging fruit first, the big polluters,” Ferrell said. “Now, they’re going after the rest.”

Are they picking on agriculture? Ferrell says not exactly, although some programs, such as concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFO), may be priorities. “Everyone is subject to pressure,” he said. “A lot of small businesses are getting squeezed by environmental regulations” that have already hit big business.

He said when the industry asks if “they are coming after us,” we have to determine: “Who are they and who is us?” “They” could be the EPA, the federal government or interest groups, he said. And “we” may be hard to identify. “We talk about ag as one unified front, but from the outside we look different.” He said outsiders see divisions within the ag industry—livestock versus grain, for instance.

Discuss this Article 1

Debbie Reed (not verified)

on Nov 16, 2011

I could not agree more about the need for the ag community to collaborate and provide a united front on these issues. Also, I think the same approach is necessary for 'faux' regulations from the private sector, in the form of sustainable supply chain initiatives targeted at reducing the environmental footprint of ag. Though many multinationals and big box retailers profess to a 'value chain' approach, there is no value to ag in being squeezed and forced to comply with retailers' standards, or face buyer and market losses. The retailers get the green benefit, but ag's only incentive is to comply or lose buyers.